Cases 1 - 10 of 14
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF INDIANA v. MV REALTY OF INDIANA, LLC et al
as 1:2023cv01578
Defendant:
AMANDA J. ZACHMAN, ANTONY MITCHELL, MV REALTY OF INDIANA, LLC and others
Plaintiff:
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF INDIANA
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
WEINSCHENK v. UNITED STATES et al
as 1:2022cv01150
Plaintiff:
CHARLES WEINSCHENK
Defendant:
STATE OF INDIANA, ERIC HOLCOMB, SUZANNE CROUCH and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 2333 Civil Remedies: Anti-Terrorism Act of 1991
Cannon Bey et al v. City of Chicago, et al
as 2:2020cv00373
Defendant:
Guzman, Robert Dyckman, Toni Preckwinkle and others
Plaintiff:
Christopher Cannon:Bey, People of the United States of America Republic and Christopher Cannon Bey
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961
MARTINDALE v. INDIANA UNIVERSITY HEALTH BLOOMINGTON, INC.
as 1:2019cv00513
Defendant:
INDIANA UNIVERSITY HEALTH BLOOMINGTON, INC.
Plaintiff:
KENNETH "TONY" MARTINDALE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1395 dd
Toure et al v. Navient Solutions, Inc.
as 1:2017cv00071
Plaintiff:
TONY HEARD and SHELLY TOURE
Defendant:
NAVIENT SOLUTIONS, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Shah et al v. Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. et al
as 3:2016cv00815
Plaintiff:
Shah, Local 1500 UFCW, Rajesh M Shah and others
Defendant:
Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc, J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, Betsy J Bernard and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
NGUYEN v. ENDOCYTE, INC. et al
as 1:2014cv01048
Defendant:
P. RON ELLIS and ENDOCYTE, INC.
Plaintiff:
TONY NGUYEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
CLEVENGER et al v. BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON
as 1:2013mc00122
Defendant:
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON
Plaintiff:
KIMBRA CALCATERRA and TONY CLEVENGER
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2011cv01384
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
